National Law Journal Recognizes Jenner & Block's Appellate Practice for Third Year in a Row

For a third year in a row, Jenner & Block was named to the “Appellate Hot List” by the National Law Journal. The newspaper’s annual list recognizes firms that made “exemplary contributions to appellate practice during the year,” and had “at least one significant appellate victory since January 2010” and an “impressive track record overall.”

The National Law Journal noted that during the past eight years, Jenner & Block has argued 25 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and that during the past year alone “the firm delivered a significant First Amendment win” and another victory that “could affect thousands of asylum seekers and immigrants seeking safety in the United States.”  The NLJ noted that the cases on the list are those which “affected the course of industries” and “vindicated important constitutional rights.”  The newspaper highlighted three of the Firm’s recent cases citing:
 

• Partner Paul M. Smith’s victory on behalf of Hastings Outlaw, a gay student group, in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez.  The group sided with the University of California Hastings College of the Law in defense of a law school policy against officially recognizing student groups that discriminate against gays. A Christian group refused to admit members who refused to disavow homosexual conduct. The school's open-membership policy for student groups, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote, was reasonable and "textbook viewpoint neutral."
   
• Partner Elaine J. Goldenberg’s and Partner Lindsay C. Harrison’s win in Kucana v. Holder, the case of Agron Kucana, a citizen of Albania who applied for asylum after his visa expired, turned on the Supreme Court's interpretation of a federal statute that the government claimed limited judicial review of Board of Immigration Appeals decisions. The team persuaded the Court that the plain language of the law refuted the government. The outcome will help determine the future of thousands of immigrants who depend on the federal courts to remain in this country.
   
• Partner Elaine J. Goldenberg’s win in Hui v. Castaneda, a case in which the appellant was an immigration detainee who died of cancer after state and federal officials refused his repeated requests for treatment and a biopsy of a bleeding lesion over a period of 15 months. The client was a Public Health Service worker being sued as an individual. The Supreme Court concluded unanimously that federal law shielded the client from individual claims. The firm argued that the outcome was essential to the health service's ability to recruit qualified doctors.
   

The cases handled by Jenner & Block in the Supreme Court have been among the most significant.  In 2009, the Firm was successful in two important immigration law cases that will affect potentially thousands of asylum seekers and immigrants fleeing persecution abroad and pursuing safety in the United States.  One of those, Nken v. Holder, was argued by an Associate who was making her first argument not only in the U.S. Supreme Court, but in any court.  In 2008, in Bridge v Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co., the Firm achieved a precedent-setting decision which settled a long-standing split in the circuits and eliminated a judicially-created obstacle to meritorious RICO claims in several jurisdictions.  Over time, the Firm’s landmark victories have included Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. (2005) (addressing secondary liability of Internet file-sharing services), Wiggins v. Smith (2003) (addressing standards for effective counsel in the death penalty sentencing phase), Lawrence v. Texas (2003) (holding all sodomy laws unconstitutional), and even Witherspoon v. Illinois (1968) (holding that it is unconstitutional in a murder trial to exclude all jurors who object to the death penalty).

This term, the Firm has two cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.  In November 2010, Partner Paul M. Smith presented oral arguments before the Court on behalf of the Firm’s client, Entertainment Software Association, in Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association, a case involving a California law banning minors from purchasing or renting “violent video games.”  In January 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the 20-year-old case of General Dynamics v. United States, a case arising out of the government's cancellation of a multi-billion dollar contract with Jenner & Block client General Dynamics (and McDonnell Douglas - now Boeing), to develop and build the A-12 stealth aircraft.  Jenner & Block is General Dynamics’ counsel of record on the matter.

The Appellate and Supreme Court practice group is chaired by Partner Paul M. Smith and includes Partners Elaine J. Goldenberg, Marc A. Goldman, Lindsay C. Harrison, Matthew S. Hellman, and Barry Levenstam, Of Counsels William M. Hohengarten and Benjamin K. Miller, and Associates Jessica Ring Amunson, Irina Y. Dmitrieva, Matthew E. Price, and Joshua M. Segal.

Please click here to view a copy of the NLJ profile on Jenner & Block.